some allowance must be made for the carelessness of transcribers, but after every allowance is made, there is enough to convict both texts of a late origin, and to make it extremely probable that both are translations from the Latin a.

EDITIONS.

The first edition of the Pastor of Hermas appeared at Paris 1513, fol., under the care of Jacobus Faber (Stapulensis). Dressel praises it for the correctness of the text. It was reprinted in most of the subsequent collections of the Fathers. It was also edited by Barth in 1655. Cotelerius, as we have seen, inserted a new recension of it in his collection. It was after that edited by Fell, Oxford 1685, and Fabricius made it part of his Codex Apocryphus Nov. Test. Tom. iii. Hamburg. 1719. It appeared also in Russel, Gallandi and Migne. Since that time it has been published by Hefele and Dressel. An Ethiopic translation of the Pastor of Hermas has been edited: "Hermæ Pastor Æthiopice primum edidit et Æthiopica Latine vertit Antonius d'Abbadie. Leipzig 1860." The conclusion maintains that Hermas is Paul; in other words, that the prophet Hermas is no other than the apostle Paul. He adduces several reasons for this opinion; among others the words of the Acts, "They called Silas Zeus, and Paul Hermes." In two of the similitudes several chapters are condensed. This happens in regard to the famous passage on the Son being the Spirit.

A translation is given in Wake's Genuine Epistles of the Apostolical Fathers.

a The reasons for the genuineness of the Simonidean text and refutations of the objections, are given in Anger's Preface, and in Nachträgliche Bemerkungen zu Hermas von Rudolph Anger und Wilhelm Dindorf: Three Parts: Leipzig 1856-58.

CHAPTER VI.

PAPIAS.

I. LIFE.

THE only reliable sources from which we derive information with regard to Papias are the works of Irenæus and Eusebius. Irenæus mentions him as a hearer of John,'' a companion of Polycarp,' and calls him an ancient mana.' There has been much dispute as to whether the John here mentioned was the apostle John; for Eusebius is decidedly of opinion that he was not a hearer of John the apostle. The historian has supplied us with his evidence. He appeals to a passage at the commencement of the work of Papias which runs thus : "But I shall not be slow to put down along with my interpretations those things which I learned well from the elders and remembered well, assuring you of the truth with regard to them. For I did not, like the many, delight in those who spoke much, but in those who taught the truth; not in those who rehearsed the commands of others, but in those who rehearsed the commands given by the Lord to faith, and proceeding from truth itself. If then any one who had attended on the elders came, I inquired diligently as to the words of the elders; what Andrew or what Peter said, or Philip, or Thomas, or James, or John, or Matthew, or any other of the disciples of the Lord; and what things Aristion

a Adv. Hæres. v. 33, 4; also in Euseb. Hist. Eccl. iii. 39.

b For the inferences which may be drawn in regard to our gospels from this passage, see Westcott, Hist. of Can. p. 78.

c Valesius translates aλλorpías évтoλás, ‘nova quædam et inusitata præcepta.' Something new and strange is implied in the very contrast between these commands and those of Christ.

and the elder John, the disciples of the Lord, say. For I was of opinion that what could be got in books would not profit me so much as what I could get from the living and abiding voiced." Eusebius infers from the double mention of the name of John that two Johns existed, and that the lattermentioned John, called the elder or presbyter, was the instructor of Papias. We think Eusebius is right in his inference. As Eusebius well remarks, Papias makes a clear distinction between what Peter and John and the other apostles said, and what Aristion and the elder or presbyter John were still saying. He plainly confessed too that his information was derived not from the apostles themselves, but from those who had been in the company of the apostles. And Eusebius further informs us that Papias made frequent mention of Aristion and John the elder in his work, quoting their traditions. We scarcely think that Eusebius could have been mistaken on such a point as this, for the traditions of John the elder must have been easily distinguishable from those of the apostle. At the same time we are inclined to think that Irenæus meant the apostle John in his statement, but even this is by no means certain. For in mentioning John before, he simply calls him a disciple of the Lord, which John the presbyter was; while, if he had meant the apostle John, he would probably have called him apostle. Besides, there is nothing impossible in the supposition that Papias should in his boyhood have listened to the Christian veteran, have failed to remember much of his discourse, and been therefore dependent on those who were older than himself. In fact, if he had met many of those who had conversed with the other apostles, who all left this world a considerable time before John, he must have been born before the death of John.

Of his life and death we know nothing on good authority, except that he was overseer of the church sojourning in Hierapolis, a city of Phrygia and the birthplace of the great Stoic philosopher Epictetus. Later writers have • Ibid. iii. 36.

d Euseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. iii. 39.

described his martyrdomf; somes saying that he suffered with Onesimus at Rome, othersh that Pergamus was the scene of his death, and that the event happened at the same time as the martyrdom of Polycarp.

II. WRITINGS AND TEACHING.

"An

Irenæusi mentions that Papias wrote five books, and Eusebius informs us that the name of the book was Exposition of the Lord's sayingsk." Of the nature of this work we can form no exact idea, as all the extracts, except one, which have come down to us are of an historical nature. This much we know from the passage already quoted, that it was based on unwritten tradition, and Eusebius also asserts that it contained some strange parables and teachings of the Lord and other things of a somewhat fabulous nature (μvoiкóτepa). Eusebius describes Papias as a man "most learned in all things, and well acquainted with the Scriptures!." In another place, however, he estimates him from his work as having an exceedingly small mind. Various efforts have been made to reconcile these apparently discrepant statements, and some have entirely rejected the first, partly on account of the supposed discrepancy, and partly because the passage is not found in several manuscripts. It seems to me most likely that there is a real discrepancy, but that that discrepancy existed in the original work of Eusebius; that when mentioning him first in company with others he spoke of him as he ought to have done, but in coming suddenly upon a dogma which he disliked, he rashly pronounced the propounder of it a man of small capacity. At the same time there can be no doubt that the praise and the blame might justly fall on the same man; that a man might be λoyiúratos, a very great reader, and yet a very poor thinker.

f Gobarus in Phot. Bibl. 232.

g Halloix from the Acts of Onesimus: but see Pormaneder, Patrol. Spec. P. 59, note 18.

Chron. Pasch. ad. ann. 163.

Hist. Eccl. iii. 39. 1 Ibid. iii. 36.

i Adv. Hær. v. 33, 34.

m Ibid. 39.

The only point of doctrine on which we have the opinion of Papias is that of the millennium. He held, according to Eusebius", "that there would be some millennium after the resurrection of the dead, when the personal reign of Christ would be established upon this earth." Eusebius was probably mistaken. Papias and most, perhaps all, early Christians believed, if they had a belief on the matter, that after the resurrection the just would dwell upon this earth renewed and beautified. It is likely that Eusebius identified this opinion. with the belief in a millennium. Even modern critics have found a reference to the millennium in a speech which Papias set down as Christ's on the authority of the elders. We get our information from Irenæus, who says that the "elders who had seen John, the disciple of Christ, remembered that they heard from him how the Lord taught with regard to those days, and said, "The days will come in which vines shall grow having ten thousand branches, and in each branch ten thousand twigs, and in each twig ten thousand shoots, and in each shoot ten thousand clusters, and in each cluster ten thousand grapes, and each grape when pressed will give five-and-twenty metretes of wine. And when one of the saints shall lay hold of a cluster, another shall cry out, 'I am a better cluster, take me, bless the Lord through me.' In like manner he said that a grain of wheat would produce ten thousand ears, and each ear would have ten thousand grains, and each grain would weigh ten pounds of clear, pure, fine flour; and that apples, and seeds, and grass would be in similar proportions; and that all animals using as food what is received from the earth would become peaceable and harmonious, being subject to men in all subjection." Irenæus says that these words of Christ were given in the fourth book of Papias. "And he [Papias] added, saying, 'These things can be believed by those who believe.' And Judas the traitor not believing and asking, how shall such growths be accomplished by the Lord? the Lord said, 'They shall see who shall come to them."" There is nothing improbable in the statement that the Lord spoke

n Hist. Eccl. iii. 39.